From owner-freebsd-ports Sun Nov 7 1:29:37 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-ports@freebsd.org Received: from m0.cs.berkeley.edu (m0.CS.Berkeley.EDU [128.32.45.176]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F73614A04 for ; Sun, 7 Nov 1999 01:29:36 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from asami@stampede.cs.berkeley.edu) Received: from silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (sji-ca7-01.ix.netcom.com [209.109.235.1]) by m0.cs.berkeley.edu (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id BAA97928; Sun, 7 Nov 1999 01:29:34 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from asami@stampede.cs.berkeley.edu) Received: (from asami@localhost) by silvia.hip.berkeley.edu (8.9.3/8.6.9) id BAA77902; Sun, 7 Nov 1999 01:29:29 -0800 (PST) To: "Justin M. Seger" Cc: ports@freebsd.org, kiri@pis.toba-cmt.ac.jp Subject: Re: japanese/camltk41 and x11/camltk41 References: From: asami@freebsd.org (Satoshi - Ports Wraith - Asami) Date: 07 Nov 1999 01:29:28 -0800 In-Reply-To: "Justin M. Seger"'s message of "Sat, 6 Nov 1999 15:49:16 -0500 (EST)" Message-ID: Lines: 13 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.7/Emacs 20.4 Sender: owner-freebsd-ports@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.org * From: "Justin M. Seger" * Unless anyone has any objections, I would like to nuke these two ports. * * Let me know if anyone has any reason to keep these around. I don't have an objection, but you may want to say why you would like to nuke these two ports. :) Sending a mail to the maintainer saying just the above is not really nice. -PW To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-ports" in the body of the message